NHTSA Submits Rear Visibility Rule to White House, May Mandate Backup Cameras
After several delays, on Dec. 25th, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration submitted a proposed revised regulation to the White House that could mandate automakers to equip cars and light trucks with backup cameras. According to Automotive News, the regulation will be part of new rear visibility standards for passenger vehicles sold in the U.S and the rationale for the backup cameras is to prevent children from being injured or killed by drivers that don’t see them behind their cars when traveling in reverse. NHTSA estimates that backup cameras would save about 100 lives a year.
No details on the planned standards have been released yet.
The release of a final rule, part of implementing the Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Safety Act, enacted in 2008, has been delayed four times since the original deadline at the end of 2011. Congressional backers of that legislation blame the delays on the White House, saying that it rejected NHTSA’s original 2010 proposal that would have required all new light vehicles to be sold with backup cameras by 2014. Since then, backup cameras have become more common as navigation screens capable of displaying a camera feed have proliferated. Some automakers have made backup cameras standard equipment on some models and in the case of Honda, across their entire U.S. lineup.
Still, many cars and light trucks are not available with the safety feature and auto safety advocates have pressed for the regulations. In September, Consumers Union, the advocacy wing of Consumer Reports magazine, filed a lawsuit to compel the Obama Administration to make backup cameras part mandatory. Scott Michelman, an attorney at the group Public Citizen, which supported the lawsuit, said at the time, “When Congress ordered this rule issued in three years, they meant three years, not seven.”
More by TTAC Staff
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- SCE to AUX I get it, and yet I don't. Time has put a lot of distance between the 1964.5 and the 2025, and Ford has already sullied the Mustang name by putting it on a vehicle completely unrelated to this one.I guess 1965 somebodys will see fit to pay Ford and its local dealer a hefty premium to 'celebrate' the Mustang name.Are the 30th Anniversary Mustangs worth a nickel today? Better yet, how about the 10th Anniversary Mustangs?
- SCE to AUX Oddly, my 22 Santa Fe has higher HP and torque from its 2.5T/8DCT drivetrain, but it has similar fuel economy (22/28).Must be a different ECU tune for the Elantra N.
- Lou_BC EV weight is a BS argument as long as people buy 1/2 ton and HD pickups for personal use.
- SCE to AUX This sounds like it's related to the service brakes and the automatic braking software sensitivity, not the parking brake.My making it hyper-sensitive to save the children, they imperiled the other children.
- SCE to AUX Too bad they didn't include Level 2.Banning Level 5 may be a mistake, since on paper it must work (unlike Level 2, which doesn't have to work). My concern is that mfr claims about Level 5 will be shattered by reality.
Comments
Join the conversation
So, Here in VA we have annual "safety" inspections. If a camera or screen stops working will the car fail the "safety" inspection? The "safety" inspection requires that all safety related systems on the car work. For example, if my '98 A4 has the AirBag or ABS light on... FAIL. Never mind I still have a working seat belt and never mind that there are people out there driving cars that never had an AirBag or ABS. So when the 3rd owner rolls around and the screen has since displayed its last pixel will that presumably financially constrained individual be compelled to fork over $$$ to fix it? Probably. In my opinion, this is BS.
This horse may have died, but I must add this - My 2013 Equinox lacks both a camera and a beeper. Backing up to park requires me to unbuckle my seat belt in order to see even the partially blocked view available. Narrow windows and fat pillars are the stylish culprits. I haven't hit anything yet, and I'd prefer a beeper to a distracting screen, but this is ridiculous. Of course, by the time theses systems are mandated, tall greenhouses will be back in style, solving this avoidable problem.